calgarymicro

There's also SerenityOS LibWeb/Ladybird[0], which is very active, though I wouldn't say they've made it to being daily drivable yet.

[0]https://ladybird.dev/

They also say things like "Efficient built-in ad blocker Based on Ublock Origin" and "Keyboard navigation Vim bindings", so I think they're developing both a new browser and a new engine for the browser to use, and kind of conflating the two when discussing features on their home page.

> a new survey found that a staggering 85% of Americans fear job loss in 2024. What’s more, MyPerfectResume’s 2024 Workplace Trends Survey found that job seekers have negative sentiments around several issues for 2024.

Well, surely a company called MyPerfectResume has no incentive to create anxiety about layoffs and job-seeking. In any case, I would like to see the survey methodology and crosstabs (released by all reputable pollsters) before I take this seriously.

No PETs had a membrane keyboard to my knowledge. The original 2001 did have an atrocious calculator-style chiclet keyboard though.

Why would it?

> Through images under free licenses, they create visual and audiovisual narratives on collaborative internet platforms.

>Also Netflix initially planned more than one season

No they didn't. The article is pretty clear that they only greenlit one season. That 'locked for life' quote is saying that if Netflix decided to buy more seasons and/or spinoffs, Rinsch was guaranteed involvement, aka Netflix couldn't just fire and replace him (like NBC did to Dan Harmon on Community for example).

Where does it say that? Among the metrics they use are unemployment, job openings, and GDP growth. Seems pretty standard to me. The Fed article that discusses a new index isn't 'fabricating' a new index; they developed a way to separate the performance of the metropolitan area from the city proper so good performance for the overall metro area wouldn't give an I correctly rosy picture of the city proper. If you're gonna tell me to read my links, maybe you should make sure you read them first.

Please do quote me exactly where it says this new Detroit-only metric shows the city doing better than the metro-inclusive metric. I'm particularly curious to see where it says that since the article explicitly points out that the Detroit-only index performed worse than the metro-inclusive index.

> Moreover, the city’s economic growth more frequently dropped back into negative territory than the MSA’s:

Worth noting that California's net neutrality law[0] probably stymied most efforts by ISPs to start prioritizing traffic nationwide.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_P...

Almost zero cases start in SCOTUS, but they can all be appealed there eventually.

>given the officers consulted the "City’s Law Director and the judges who issued the warrants," there was evidence of that disagreement.

Based on the CiC. v. Husted opinion that the judges cited in Novak, the officers don't need to consult anybody or be aware of a disagreement; there just needs to be the possibility of one, the argument being that we shouldn't hold public officals to a higher standard than judges, so if judges could disagree about the constitutionality of sonething then the officials should be able to as well. This seems like a comically low bar to me that could easily be met here.

> Municipalities vigorously defend themselves for a reason.

Of course they'll defend themselves vigorously in court, but will it change the behavior of the officers and officials in question if they're shielded from liability? I doubt it, though I hope I'm wrong.

> And I think that could even be fair, especially if the mayor and cop thought they were acting according to the law. The law they relied on didn't come out of nowhere, after all.

Well, I suppose if you think that, then you agree about the liklihood of qualified immunity getting applied here. But I can't imagine that the mayor or police believed this rule was constitutional, and I think that shows in their rapid and discrete removal of the rule following Petersen's acquittal.

> the city council delegated authority to the mayor. For instance, if the mayor thought a comment or question was “derogatory,” the mayor could enforce the city’s policy however he saw fit . . . Conversely, if someone else thought a comment or question was “derogatory,” but not the mayor, nothing would happen.

> That ambiguity doesn't exist here.

The bar is much lower than whether or not the court thinks the speech is protected or not. The court could unambiguously believe the rule is unconstitutional and the speech was protected, but if they believe there's any room at all for 'reasonable disagreement' on the matter among other judges, then the officers and officials get immunized.

> The municipal liability is just much clearer.

This would be nice, assuming courts agree, but until officers and officials start getting held personally liable for these events, they will never stop happening. If the PD and officials are shielded from liability but the municipality isn't, then all that happens is that taxpayers will continue to pick up the tab for police misconduct.

> In this case, the town's law is itself being challenged. Again, much clearer.

Well, he's seeking damages from the mayor, officers, and municipality first and foremost; the council rule has actually already been removed. I hope you're right that he might get something from the municipality, but I doubt he'll get anything from the mayor or PD.

> There was no judicial oversight in this case.

The important part is the use of protected speech as probable cause to seek the warrant. If officers are shielded from accountability for illegally using protected speech as a basis for probable cause, then the lack of a warrant doesn't help Petersen.

> Novak established "protected speech cannot serve as the basis for probable cause."

It did not establish this; this was long standing case law, as the opinion points out. What it established was that police have qualified immunity from being sued for illegally using protected speech as probable cause if 'judges could “reasonably disagree”' about whether or not the speech is protected. In this case, if the PD can convince a judge that there was any room at all for 'reasonable disagreement' about whether or not a council rule that prohibits "derogatory statements or comments about any individual" is unconstitutional, then the PD will get let off the hook, even if the speech ends up being unambiguously protected. All that is needed is the 'reasonable disagreement' to immunize the officers, even if the conclusion is foregone.

For those who think this case will be a slam dunk, don't be so sure. SCOTUS recently rejected an appeal from a man who was arrested for making a parody FB page of his local police department, then denied the right to sue on the grounds of 'qualified immunity'.[0] As a side note, this was the case where The Onion submitted a humorous amicus brief;[1] it's worth a read.

[0]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court...

[1]https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...

> the city’s property tax will be reduced from 2% for every $1 of assessed value (which is less than market value) to 0.6%. To make up for the revenues lost, land will be taxed at a new rate of 11.8%

This sounds like it's revenue neutral, so it doesn't seem like they're squeezing more. Also, they didn't eliminate all taxes on improvements, but cutting them by two thirds is still pretty good.

If the city is to be believed, most of Detroit's residents and business will actually be unsqueezed.[0]

> The city estimates that the LVT plan would reduce property taxes for 97 percent of Detroit homeowners and 70 percent of small businesses

[0]https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/detroit-considers-shi...

So if Detroit's economic collapse is the fault of local Democrats (and not, say, the death of large parts of the US auto industry), then does that mean we also have to credit local Democrats for Detroit's rapid economic recovery[0][1][2] over the past decade or so?

[0]https://detroitmi.gov/news/u-m-economic-forecast-shows-detro...

[1]https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2023/02/08/michig...

[2]https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/chicago-fed-letter/2...

Why would 23andMe face any criminal liability? Per the article, they were never breached; only individual accounts with reused credentials exposed in other breaches. They should have had 2FA, but I don't think not having 2FA should be criminalized.

> Not deflecting the stupidity and criminality of 23andme...how stupid can a corporation working with this sensitive type of data be

Really? If the article is accurate, 23andMe did not have a security breach; credentials leaked in other breaches were used to compromise accounts that reused those credentials on 23andMe. Now certainly 2FA would have been advisable, but I think it's a bit much to suggest this rises to the level of criminality.

> the major multimedia news agency in the Spanish language

That's probably why.

> involved a non-favored foreign state

Egypt is not 'non-favored'. The US has very close ties with Egypt's dictatorial regime[0], despite its awful domestic human rights record[1].

[0]https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/58552...

[1]https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/09/egypt-human-r...

> The journalist replied "You could just have said you don't believe them," to which Gore – astonishingly – replied: "I didn't say that," before going on to enumerate how any crimes Clinton may have committed were balanced out by his record of public service?!

Is there anywhere I can read about this? I tried feeding this into Google with quotes and got no results.

What's so hard to understand? Nixon was literally caught on tape[0] conspiring to cover up CREEP payments; it's a bit funny to claim Watergate was all a deep stage conspiracy to screw Nixon when he was recorded committing crimes.

[0]https://watergate.info/1972/06/23/the-smoking-gun-tape.html

Wow, the deep state is so powerful that they got Nixon to say on tape that he was going to try to get the CIA to falsely use national security as an excuse to stonewall an FBI investigation. Poor innocent Nixon was no match for their telepathic powers.

They still have a ton of active repos[0], but yeah, this one seems dead; all of the repos it links to in the readme are archived or deleted.

[0]https://github.com/GSA

> Life is probably not bad in North Korea, than the propaganda lead you to believe.

If this were the case then it would not be necessary for them to shoot people trying to leave.

It wasn't repealed, it was amended[0] to allow the US AGM (formerly BBG) to broadcast in the US - in other words, VOA, RFE/RL, RFA, etc. Still pretty easy to look out for.

[0]https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/5736...

> They don't know these things because they don't care to know

Or they don't have the time or wherewithal to study for a test for whatever reason. This is the problem with trying to apply a standard to 300 million people - if 0.5% of people are the corner cases, there are 1.5 million corner cases. There are actually 14 million households in the US without internet access.[0]

> I don't see that as 'not letting' them vote. It's more 'if you really care about voting you'll do some basic due diligence first

The fact is that in order to implement this, you would have to turn away people who show up to the polls having fulfilled their end of the social contract (paying taxes, following laws, etc.). You lose the consent of the governed. And even that ignores the question of who would write and grade the test in the first place - the US has a sordid history of literacy tests being used to intentionally exclude certain groups from the franchise, and you'd have to find someone (definitely not Vivek) who could be trusted to do that job. Having the best of intentions doesn't matter when the choice of which questions to include/excluded can swing elections and disenfranchise millions.

[0]https://www.lendingtree.com/home/mortgage/internet-access-st...

A lack of civic knowledge among the populace is a failure of the education system, not the people themselves. If you give people the obligations of living in a democracy (paying taxes, subjecting themselves to its laws, signing up for the draft, etc.) without actually letting them participate in that democracy, then it's not a democracy anymore. 85%[0] of Americans don't know when the Constitution was written; 61% of Americans don't know the three branches of government.[1] Barring well over half of Americans from voting would not end well.

[0]https://woodrow.org/news/how-well-americans-know-constitutio...

[1]https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/americans-know-more...

Really? If we're going to arbitrarily require a competence test for all voters under 25, then I say we should also mandate a competence test for all voters over age 65 (he hasn't proposed that one for some reason). Ironically enough, Vivek himself might fail the test (that he wouldn't have to take given his age), seeing as he seems to think the Constitution was ratified before the end of the Revolutionary War.[0] Given that, I wouldn't trust him to write such a test, or to appoint people to write one. So who exactly would write the test?

[0]https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/reidout-blog/vivek-ramaswa...

I think his proposal to bar people under 25 from voting unless they pass a civics test is pretty bad.

> I know superficially why you think that: PDF are Good Guys killing Bad Guys, and ISIS are Bad Guys killing Good Guys.

Like I said, I feel no obligation to explain myself to someone who frames their questions in such an obviously bad faith way. But it does make me want to ask you a question - if you view people killing other people as all the same, do you see no distinction between ISIS suicide bombers indiscriminately killing civilians, and Russian airstrikes killing ISIS militants? If you can see a difference, then maybe you can figure out on your own why I view some armed combatants differently from others.